Talk:GSh-18

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the GSh-18 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Firearms Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Russian & Soviet C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force

Russia: Military Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.

17 parts? Not so fast.

I put a dubious tag on the claim that the gun only has 17 parts. I did a quick search and found 37 parts compared to a Glock's 34. I am not sure why, other than propaganda, they would claim this, but I believe it must be corrected. The source is simply wrong. --Winged Brick (talk) 06:53, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They didn't count the magazine, the body and the upper slide just the internal parts. There is an official (Russian army) full stripping illustration, containing 23 elements (4 making the magazine + slide and body) and many other sources that state the same (including KPB design documents), so no the source is not wrong.

Hey do you know the difference between Russian propaganda and Western propaganda? Westerners actually believe theirs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.28.32.32 (talk) 05:10, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. No. You're not going to get away with saying any of that. They are comparing the actual total part count for the Glock with the field-stripped parts count of their gun. Also, it's not propaganda to state facts. The Glock part count is also from the original sales media and, lo and behold, the parts count is correct. The Russians did and do make good weapons, but there is no reason to LIE about it. Just state the facts. Lower bore axis. Simpler construction. Novel operating System. Larger mag capacity. Why lie? The Makarov is a modern work of art. It is a beautifully simple design. This gun is not that simple, but pretty good. --Winged Brick (talk) 05:32, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree but then further down the article states how a Sig Sauer P226 is more simple to disassemble having done a complete disassembly of a Sig Sauer P226 with over 50 parts to the GSh's 30+ parts I find that a hard claim to believe or even agree to. Could this be due to a misunderstanding? Field strip vs Disassembly? Hiakuryu (talk) 11:12, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on GSh-18. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:52, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]